Re: [rtcweb] Last day for any additional Video Codec Selection alternatives

Sounds to me like an issue that should be "voted on" before the actual vote.

If voting proceeds, I am in favor of disqualifying any ballot that omits 
a ranking for a voting option. The entire point of this process is to 
look for a compromise, not to let people vote for their favorite option 
and nothing else. It is highly unlikely that anyone's 1st choice will 
end up winning.

Gili

On 27/11/2013 4:42 PM, Mo Zanaty (mzanaty) wrote:
> Several folks have objected to a vote. Is it worthwhile to have an
> alternative that expresses this?
>
> ³Voting MUST NOT be used to decide MTI video codec(s).²
>
> I realize it is whacky to ask someone to vote to express an objection to
> voting. But otherwise, how will the chairs/ADs be able to reconcile the
> objections with the vote results? I¹ve only seen a handful of voting
> objections, and only several dozen total voices expressing various
> opinions, while the rooms seemed packed with hundreds and the list has
> over a thousand subs. I have no idea where rough consensus lies in the
> larger community, nor how significant voting objections may be in that
> larger community. But that seems like useful, perhaps essential,
> information to know how to interpret the results. For example, if 40%
> objected to voting (as a first choice), that would immediately send a red
> flag no matter what result was ultimately selected via instant runoff.
> Conversely, if only 1% objected to voting, that may be less of a concern.
> Of course, a small minority of objectors may argue that is the essence of
> their objection to voting in the first place.
>
> I also support the option of not ranking any equally undesired
> alternatives. Especially for those who choose only the alternative above.
>
> Mo
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb